3 ms·
I understand what you're saying, and I wear a seatbelt every time. Having said that: should "saves lives" be a consideration for making laws? Cigarette smoking
by discardorama 12y ago
I understand what you're saying, and I wear a seatbelt every time. Having said that: should "saves lives" be a consideration for making laws? Cigarette smoking kills (or hastens the death anyways, along with causing suffering); should we ban cigarettes, or fine people for smoking, in the interest of saving lives? Suppose tomorrow research comes out that, say, taking a folic acid supplement daily saves lives (I just picked a supplement off the top of my head, please don't get hung up on that). Should the government mandate daily folic acid intake? Should you be fined if you forgot to take it (let's assume a cop can detect if you took it or not)?
I'm no libertarian, but I worry about "saves lives" being the sole justification for a law... This is not a strong opinion, so I'd be happy to hear counter arguments.
- kd0amg 12y agoThere's a difference between protecting people from themselves and protecting people from each other. There already exist laws restricting where people can smoke in the interest of making it easier for non-smokers to reduce their exposure to second-hand smoke.
- roywiggins 12y ago> Should the government mandate daily folic acid intake? Areas with fluoridated water do this sort of thing already, more or less.
- millstone 12y agoIn many states, newborns are legally required to receive antibiotic or silver eye drops, which protect them from conjunctivitis and blindness. Or more dramatically, mandatory vaccination laws: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts .